bisceglie on smash

Its no secret that the internet sucks. But articulating just what sucks about the actual 'internet,' or world wide web and what its used for is tough to finger. The conceptual nature and the 'physical' structure of the internet are two entirely different entities, each capable of unique existence and purpose. This also characterizes the internets two categories of shortcomings - technological and not (largely social, psychological, even philosophical). I was speaking with a friend over AIM, when the subject of this essay came up. She said "the internet sucks because it makes people lazy." I replied, "thats asinine." Still, this exemplifies most peoples' thoughts on technology and the internet - the mass cognitive dissonance that humanity resonates with. The internet is a phenomenal tool that has enormous - infinite potential - to aide human existence, production, advancement, progression, etc.
All said, the WWW/internet/whatever [is and] is not a physically substantial entity. The digital medium is abstract - representative - not subject to the constraints of physical reality, yet somehow given subjective and fluctuating value. The abstract needs an interface - or an interface to the interface. . There must be something that allows one some way to create something completely inhuman, outside our scope. Of course, this is not the ends, as any media must not to exist in and of itself, for the sole purpose of existence. the assigned mode and modus must be proactive. It should be treated as Plato's perfect circles - Aristotelian. Exchange 'hypertext' for 'hyper-context.' I understand current bandwidth constraints, but preparation should be underway to cycle in the new media.
Still, there needs to be a 'geography'. This geography would of course be dynamic - slave to the specific instant.
Whenever immersive computing comes up, I immediately think of Flatland (Abbott). Geometric entities sliding around a plane [read monitor screen] according to The Rules. The digital network requires a new science - a new geometry - Multidimensional and liquid.
Tagging is a valiant effort to tame the hodgepodge, but is not nearly adequate. The future of tagging lies in spammers tagging the hell out of lots and lots of crap. True, this abuse can be accounted for, to some extent, by algorithms... but it is an imperfect solution - like most things, looking at a symptom (quick fix) and not a cure for the actual ailment.
Artificial Intelligence is almost necessary for real functionality. Intelligent parsing. At least intelligent algorithms for data mining - subjective classification / learning. virtual archivists. Artificial intelligence is a scary term - as people relate it to artificial human malignant intelligence. Simple answer - don't model it after humans. Intelligence can be easily limited and controlled. William Gibson's concept of an electromagnetic shotgun wired to the AI head is but a crude base. Artificial intelligence in this sense is not new at all, as it existed before the internet, before even affordable and accessible personal computers. Artificial intelligence can be as simple as a contrived anti-entropy device. [note Norbert Weiner's work].
The concept of the online avatar should be reversed. What is a human body but a meat-puppet chugging along to commands from your brain? Of course, its more complicated than that, but essentially, your consciousness rents a flat in a big semi-soft blob to get around and communicate and procreate. Give your brain a nice metal exoskeleton with unfathomable reflexes... better yet, just forget the physical. What's a nervous system but a conduit for interrelated electrical explosions? But that wouldn't be human, would it? It all comes back to metaphysics.

Concepts of ownership need to be modified. Commodity-centric economic systems have no room for 1s and 0s. The struggle for intellectual property. Intellectual property is ethereal, a future-primitive specter. Collage production. This isn't a new concept, at all. But now, people can create ~exact 'copies' of existing works - with very little resource expenditure. Such a readily-available spring-board for creation brings the factories to the home - the personal space, equipped with a computer, ethernet, and Red Bull - a new age of cottage industry - yet so much more. A global cottage industry.
Self-expression is a vehicle for development and innovation. The same thing was done in the industrial revolution, but now intellectual property is being abused, etc. The living conditions are better, etc. Bottom line - harnessing masses of 'creative' youngsters - the pop-cultures.
The pop-science documentary 'What the Bleep do we Know' brought up some interesting thought regarding human perception of purely new/unfamiliar phenomena. The example from the film explained that the Native Americans couldn't see the explorer's ships - since they were completely outside their frame of reference. The shamen / medicine men were the only people able to actual view the ships, until the images had time to sink in for the other members of the tribes. And thats where I fell asleep. But I wonder, would this still be the case with people today? Free time is a commodity, beauty is a real commodity. Both of these are relatively new phenomena. Appreciation and empowerment. I would like to think that I, personally, would be able to see something completely different and new - if only because I've been exposed to so many abstract concepts. This extends to a huge amount of people in society today - the age of artistry. Self-expression is valued more than ever, and available to boot, largely due to the digital publishing revolution. Technological advancement seeks to fill a glass. The glass is infinite, the liquid is infinity.